Content
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is admirably concise and well-structured for a simple skill, but its core workflow is more directional than executable and lacks explicit validation checkpoints. Concrete search/verification guidance would lift actionability and workflow clarity.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable guidance for the search step — e.g. example grep/explore-agent queries or specific entry-point files in the Effect repo to inspect first.
Insert an explicit validation checkpoint between search and answer, such as 'Confirm the located source matches the user's question before responding; if no match, broaden the search.'
Add a fallback for when the explore agent finds nothing or the clone fails, so the workflow has a complete feedback loop.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean (~20 lines), well-sectioned, and free of padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; nearly every token earns its place, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | It gives one concrete, executable step (clone URL and destination path), but the core answering steps ('Use the explore agent to search... for answers', 'Provide responses based on...') are abstract direction with no specific queries, commands, or examples. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | A clear 3-step sequence (clone, search, answer) is present, but checkpoints are only implicit — there is no verification that the clone succeeded or that found patterns actually answer the question, matching the anchor with present sequence but missing/implicit checkpoints. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | No bundle files exist, and this sub-50-line skill is cleanly organized into 'How to Answer' and 'Guidelines' sections with a single-level external reference (the cloned repo), satisfying the simple-skill exception for a top score. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |